To think horses do not belong in the Olympics

[StunningCunt]

They've got this horse prancing sideways with a toff in a top hat on the top, and they are devoting hours of TV coverage because we might get a gold medal in this nonsense?

Why don't they just have a dog show there and be done with it?

Competitive sheep herding?

Motor racing?

this guy

Hats off to him. That's courage I could never hope to have. I spent three weeks immobile on a hospital bed (and I mean immobile, I wasn't allowed to move unless a team of four rolled me) and I nearly went loop the fucking loop.

Beanie Showjumping and eventing are not subjective. You knock down or refuse a jump, you get penalised. Dressage is subjective, in a similar way to gymnastics or synchronised swimming, even boxing to some extent if it comes down to the judge's decision.

But I am loving this idea of my horse doing it all and training himself!

Even buying a top horse and riding it as well as the rider that trained it is horribly difficult and often doesn't work out.

As for riders not being as fit as track and field athletes, I don't think the latter are a very good example. They are aeroically fit but running on the flat on long distances in particular isn't very skillful. Its not really an all round test and is very dependent on where you are born and genetics, which actually makes it more exclusive than equestrianism.

Nancy - do horses get freaked out by flying? Some do - have you seen International Velvet? Black Beauty's not a patch on that.

"Beanie, the thing you are failing to understand is that a great rider will get a good performance out of ANY horse, a shit rider would have no chance on an Olympic mount."

And the thing you don't understand is that the result would not be the same. Again - Usain Bolt will still be the fastest man on earth if he wears Nikes or Pumas. Put Chris Hester on a different horse and the result would be completely different - several horsey type people have admitted that the performance of man and animal cannot be separated. That is why it does not belong at the Olympics.

Show jumping is every little girls favourite alongside gymnastics leave them alone.

Even if it pisses me of hugely to see the sexist Saudis on the podium.

I really wished there had been some women in the gold and silver teams.

Put Chris Hoy on a push bike and he wouldn't be winning either...

Put Carl Hester and all the other dressage riders on the Modern Pentathlon horses and the result might well be the same...wouldn't be so nice to watch as it wouldn't be the top horses, but its doable.

Ah well, if you're going to introduce logic...there's no logical reason why we should spend millions of pounds working out who can run fastest round a track, jump highest over a plastic bar or jump into a swimming pool with the least amount of flailing and splashing then hang a lump of metal around the neck of the person who someone decided did it best...didn't realise it was all about logic.,,

By the way, I hate being told I "don't understand something" when I simply don't agree with the poster's viewpoint. How supercillious!

beanie, if you are using that argument then you have to discount cycling too. put any of the Olympic cycling team on a BMX or a bike with no gears and they are pretty buggered too, doesn't make them any less of an athlete???

Don't understand your point Beanie....the beauty and magnificence of rider and horse working together to produce such amazing results is down to hours and hours of hard work, practice and utter understanding between them. The Olympic ideal surely?

Put Ben A in a rubber dingy with a hankie for a sail and he'd be pretty hard pressed to get a gold too.

Chipsandmayonnaise - Ivey that every time my trainer gets on my horse. Whilst I try so hard and practice all I can, I will never be able to ride as well as him. My horse looks like a grand prix horse.

That's because my trainer has ridden in the Europeans with Mary King, done Badminton, Burghley and all sorts. Lie is such a beautiful rider, it's a shame he never had the finances to help him further.

Horses are not a manufactured "prop" either, as in many sports. Its actually very pure from that point of view.

this horse prancing sideways with a toff in a top hat on the top

Couldn't be arsed to read the whole thread as the OP clearly hasn't got a bloody clue about dressage and the skill involved.......

"beanie, if you are using that argument then you have to discount cycling too. put any of the Olympic cycling team on a BMX or a bike with no gears and they are pretty buggered too, doesn't make them any less of an athlete???"

As has been pointed out several times the technical equipment in use at the Olympics is to a set standard. This is to ensure the competition is between the physical skill and ability of the athletes involved and not the technical equipment used. In that the athlete has earned the award - not the equipment they have used and they are competing on an standard platform with other athletes. Repeat the events and you will get the same results. Bolt will still be faster than Blake.

For equestrian event the performance of an "athlete" is totally dependent on the performance of their animal. Even the same animal will give different results every time. As has been agreed elsewhere - the performer and animal perform as one. This is completely at odds with every other Olympic sport.

If we allow equestrian events at the Olympics then there is no reason why we should not allow Formula 1 (for example) which should demonstrate the absurdity of it.

"Equestrian events are a celebration of man and animal which is completely at odds with every other Olympic event and indeed the Olympic values."

Did you miss my point made above Beanie that horses have been part of the olympics since 680 BC ! What format that takes has obvioulsy morphed over the years .......... but maybe not as much as you think.

Much of what the origional "sports" celebrated were the skills required to be good warriors ( one event required the athlete to run wearing armour). The chariot races were a judge of the horses speed and the charioteers driving skills.

Many of the modern dressage movements would have been based on essential skills for a warriors horse ( as re those of the spanish riding schools "dancing" horses) because the horse had to be bold but obedient despite all that went on around ..... much like the modern dressage horse.

Its not the only "subjective" sport .... just like diving and gymnastics for example dressage is judged in the execution of set movements and how that relates to "perfect".

BTW I am not "into dressage" ( I actually have some strong objections to some aspects of competitive riding) but I do recognise that the horses and riders are both athletes and on based on the principles of the olympic games have the right to compete.

and one does not need to ride a big warmblood to find out about the precision and fitness needed to ride a horse....... my "ickle" 14.1 welsh cob will soon let you know if you are pressing the wrong buttons

OP has not addressed any of my very good points, neither has Beanie, but have simply don't me I "don't understand" because I don't agree with them.

And Beanie your point sounds interesting, but of course you then rule out all sports, because all athletes compete against each other, and their success of failure is dependent on that of the other athletes. A cyclist's performance is also dependent on the performance of his bike, and on what conditions favour that athlete.

There is an argument for allowing motor based sports, the result of which is heavily dependent on skill of the driver. Apart from the fact, that you, of course, would be able to get into a F1 car and instantly drive as well as Schumacher...

"For equestrian event the performance of an "athlete" is totally dependent on the performance of their animal. Even the same animal will give different results every time. As has been agreed elsewhere - the performer and animal perform as one. This is completely at odds with every other Olympic sport."

Nope, it is a partnership. A good rider can almost hold a horse up over the jumps and place them so perfectly and inspire them so much, they don't have them down. A bit like Peter Charles in the showjumping yesterday. Sometimes the horse needs more help from the rider, sometimes the horse helps the rider out. I don't think you can really concieve how it is possible, as you have no experience of it, its outwith your realm of comprehension.

Snigger at the OP's description of the centuries-old art of dressage as being "a horse prancing sideways with a toff in a top hat on the top". Can I describe cycling as "a couple of wheels with a thin bloke/bird on top"?

Perhaps we should go back to the ancient Grecian version of the games when not only were horses not allowed but competitors were naked.

Beanie

"For equestrian event the performance of an "athlete" is totally dependent on the performance of their animal. Even the same animal will give different results every time. As has been agreed elsewhere - the performer and animal perform as one."

The rider gets the performance out of the horse, it is down to the rider and their skill, don't put the cart before the horse to make a false premise.

Blake has beaten Bolt twice this year, so a race with the same competitors can be different each time, isn't that what makes sport so interesting.

Question for you Beanie? Do you think it would be possible to take a random person off the street, train them for say 8 or 10 years, top trainers, give them a top horse to ride, and they could win an Olympic medal?

Apply the same question to rowing, could a person selected at random, for no particular attributes, be trained to win an Olympic rowing medal?

"OP has not addressed any of my very good points, neither has Beanie, "

What points? All I've seen is "well it's very skilled" which I agree with. You have singly failed to address my main point that performance of the human is totally dependent on the animal - the two cannot be separated. This is in sharp contrast to every other Olympic sport. Even those reliant on the subjective human scoring system (qv diving) is demonstrably down to the performance of the athlete. NO matter how many times Tom Daley made that dive he would have scored - if not precisely the same - then within sufficient statistical margins to render the point moot (and there is plenty of documented evidence around the variance of scoring of Olympic events and guess what - the difference is quantifiable and statistically negligible).

"There is an argument for allowing motor based sports, the result of which is heavily dependent on skill of the driver. Apart from the fact, that you, of course, would be able to get into a F1 car and instantly drive as well as Schumacher..."

I have not suggested that horse riding (or driving a formula 1) is easy but I'm glad that you concede the point that if we allow Dressage we should allow Formula 1.

"Perhaps we should go back to the ancient Grecian version of the games when not only were horses not allowed but competitors were naked."

You jest...

I've addressed all of your points and more Beanie. As have most other posters...

Which is certainly more than you have done.